What, exactly, is controversial about this? The FAA is responsible for the safety of aviation, and a lot of corporations are deliberately, flagrantly breaking the law. Sounds like a good idea that the FAA enforce the law.
The FAA tried to fine one commercial aerial photographer for "deliberately, flagrantly" breaking this law. They lost in court. Not, mind you, a judicial determination: they lost in their own administrative court, where one of their own administrative judges ruled they did not have the authority to regulate these aircraft.
Legally, nothing has changed since then, though appeals are still in progress. The FAA, thus, is attempting to assert an authority that at the present time, they have been told by their own courts that they do not have.
That's what's controversial.